Self-Expandable Metal Stents for Left Sided Colon Obstruction from Diverticulitis. A Single Center Retrospective Series.

Background and Objectives: The incidence of diverticulitis is increasing in western countries. Complicated diverticulitis is defined as diverticulitis associated with localized or generalized perforation, localized or distant abscess, fistula, stricture or obstruction. Colonic symptomatic strictures are often treated with segmental colectomy. The aim of our study is to report our experience with Self Expandable Metal Stents (SEMS) placement to relieve sigmoid obstruction secondary to diverticulitis, either as a permanent solution or as a bridge to elective colectomy. Material and Methods: From January 2016 to December 2018, 21 patients underwent SEMS placement for sigmoid obstruction secondary to diverticulitis at our institution. In four patients with poor general conditions, SEMS was considered the definitive form of treatment. In 17 patients, the stent was placed as bridge to elective colectomy. Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcomes were postoperative mortality and morbidity after SEMS and subsequent elective colectomy. Results: There was no mortality or major morbidity after SEMS placement or subsequent elective colectomy. No stoma was performed. Conclusions: Placement of Colorectal Self Expandable Stent represents a useful tool to relieve obstruction in patients with left-sided colonic diverticulitis. SEMS placement makes it possible to transform an emergency clinical condition into an elective condition, giving time to resolve the inflammation and the infection inevitably associated with complicated diverticulitis.

Sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux: a comprehensive endoscopic and pH-manometric prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The impact of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is still greatly debated. Most of the current evidence available is solely based on symptom evaluation or medication use, while a minority have implemented objective functional measurements. OBJECTIVE: To better comprehend the pathophysiological mechanisms involved in the genesis of GERD after SG. SETTING: University Hospital, Italy. METHODS: A total of 21 patients affected by morbid obesity and eligible for SG were prospectively enrolled in the present study. Patients were evaluated by means of endoscopy, high-resolution manometry (HRM), 24-hour pH monitoring, and the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire. RESULTS: Follow-up was completed at least 1 year post operation (mean follow-up, 14.3 ± 2.1 mo) by 19 patients. Body mass index decreased from 41.2 ± .9 to 26.8 ± .8 kg/m2 (P < .001). Distal contractile integral significantly decreased from 2772.8 ± 399.9 mm Hg/s/cm to 2060.4 ± 338.9 mm Hg/s/cm (P = .01). The 24-hour pH monitoring showed an overall reduction tendency of acid reflux, although this was not statistically significant. All analyzed endoscopic findings withstood substantial pejorative modifications after SG (P < .01). Distal contractile integral values at baseline predicted postoperative Z-line upward migration; HRM, distal latency, and DeMeester score at baseline predicted the development of erosive esophagitis at follow-up, by bootstrap estimates of a logistic regression. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative GERD-related esophageal sequelae should be carefully considered after SG. Our results demonstrate how acid reflux does not seem to play a relevant role in the pathophysiology of post-SG GERD. Baseline HRM can help stratify the risk of developing erosive esophagitis and Z-line upward migration after SG, while postoperative endoscopic surveillance should be encouraged regardless of the presence or absence of symptoms.

Contrast-enhanced MR mammography for evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions.

PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate accuracy of gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced magnetic resonance (MR) mammography for depiction of synchronous contralateral breast cancer in patients with newly diagnosed unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions, with histologic analysis or follow-up as reference. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study had ethics committee approval; all patients provided written informed consent. One hundred eighteen consecutive women (mean age, 52 years) with unilateral breast cancer or high-risk lesions and negative findings in the contralateral breast at physical examination, ultrasonography, and conventional mammography underwent gadobenate dimeglumine-enhanced 1.5-T MR mammography. Transverse three-dimensional T1-weighted gradient-echo images were acquired before and at 0, 2, 4, 6, and 8 minutes after gadobenate dimeglumine administration (0.1 mmol per kilogram body weight). Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) was used to categorize breast density and the level of suspicion for malignant contralateral breast lesions. Results were compared with histologic findings. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values for contrast-enhanced MR mammography were evaluated. RESULTS: Contrast-enhanced MR mammography revealed contralateral lesions in 28 (24%) of 118 patients. Twenty-four lesions were detected in patients with dense breasts (BI-RADS breast density category III or IV). Lesions in eight (29%) of 28 patients were BI-RADS category 4; patients underwent biopsy. Lesions in 20 (71%) patients were BI-RADS category 5; patients underwent surgery. At histologic analysis, 22 lesions were confirmed as malignant; six lesions were fibroadenomas. No false-negative lesions were detected; none of the fibroadenomas were BI-RADS category 5. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of contrast-enhanced MR mammography for depiction of malignant or high-risk contralateral lesions were 100%, 94%, 95%, 79%, and 100%, respectively. Follow-up findings (12-24 months) confirmed absence of contralateral lesions in 90 of 118 patients with negative contrast-enhanced MR mammographic findings in the contralateral breast. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced MR mammography is accurate for detection of synchronous contralateral cancer or high-risk lesions in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer or high-risk lesions.

Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography: does it affect surgical decision-making in patients with breast cancer?

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic imaging in women with suspected breast cancer should accurately detect and diagnose malignant tumors and facilitate the correct choice of therapy. Contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance mammography (CE-MRM) is potentially the imaging modality of choice for accurate patient management decisions. METHODS: A total of 164 women with suspected breast cancer based on clinical examination, conventional mammography and/or ultrasound each underwent preoperative bilateral CE-MRM using an axial 3D dynamic T1-weighted gradient-echo sequence and gadobenate dimeglumine as contrast agent. Images were evaluated by two readers in consensus. Histological evaluation of detected lesions was performed on samples from core biopsy or surgery. Determinations were made of the sensitivity, accuracy and positive predictive value of CE-MRM compared to mammography/ultrasound for the detection of malignant lesions and of the impact of CE-MRM for surgical decision-making. FINDINGS: Conventional mammography/ultrasound detected 175 lesions in the 164 evaluated patients. CE-MRM revealed 51 additional lesions in 34/164 patients; multifocal and multicentric cancer was detected in 7 and 4 additional patients, respectively, contralateral foci in 21 additional patients and pectoral muscle infiltration in 2 additional patients. CE-MRM also confirmed the absence or benignity of 3 and 1 lesions suspected of malignancy on mammography/ultrasound. The sensitivity and accuracy for malignant lesion detection and identification was 100% and 93.4%, respectively, for CE-MRM compared to 77.3% and 72.1% for mammography/ultrasound, respectively. Patient management was altered for 32/164 (19.5%) patients as a result of CE-MRM. INTERPRETATION: CE-MRM positively impacts patient management decisions and should be performed in all women with suspected breast cancer based on clinical examination, mammography and/or ultrasound.